The word "mediocre" has certainly had it's turn quite a bit the last 24 hours. I guess because Seattle is 6-5. I think that's quite silly, personally. Granted, Seattle's remaining season is in jeopardy thanks to the DB suspensions we're facing, but let's look back at the first 11 games.

Some people say we are mediocre. This assertion is based on the team's record and it's home/road split. It is most certainly not based on talent or on statistics. Seattle was #4 in DVOA before the Miami game, they were #2 in defense DVOA, and they are widely regarded as one of the most talented young teams in the NFL. Even after this loss- a loss I'd put squarely on the defense- Seattle will still likely have a top 5 defense for the season through 11 games. No, this argument is not based on those aspects. It's based on a 6-5 record. "You are what your record says you are."

I get that. I also think that saying is a load of crap. Ask stat guru Bill James what he'd think of a 16 game sample and he'd probably tell you that the W-L outcomes would be next to meaningless for determining how good a team actually is. The sample size needs to be much, much larger to avoid statistical noise.

But my feelings aside, here we are at 6-5. That's not great. Let's assume for a moment that your record really does say what you are. Let's also forget that Seattle's first 8 games were very tough, and that we've played one more road game than home game at this point, or that in August we'd be happy with 6-5 given the difficulty of the 1st half of this season. And let's also forget that Seattle is just one of three NFL teams (Patriots, Falcons, Seahawks) not to suffer any multiscore losses all season. Even the Packers, Texans, and 49ers have been blown out at times this year. That said, even just focusing on the 6-5 aspect, I'm not really seeing a compelling case that this team is mediocre.

Why? Because last year's Superbowl champion finished the regular season with the basically the same winning percentage that the Seahawks currently have, and they were nowhere near as well rounded as this Seahawks team or as good statistically. As much as it sucks losing on the road, nearly all west coast teams throughout NFL history have struggled on the road. Compare that to the champion Giants, who struggled AT HOME. At least the Seahawks have an excuse.

Further, Seattle has led in every road game. And they led in the 4th quarter in 3 of their 5 losses. To go 1-5 on the road in those circumstances is extremely unusual, it is definitely not normal and not sustainable. This is exactly why sample sizes matter. Everyone knows that anything can happen in one game, but it's almost just as true that anything can happen in only a few games too. Like Arizona starting 4-0 or Philly starting 3-0. Outcomes should be treated with suspicion when used for analysis, even more so when in small samples.

I think what we are seeing this season is a young team that is still playing young. The penalties and the key mistakes to barely lose games are evidence of that. I also think that this team, while very good, has room for improvement. The upgrade potential over Trufant and Hill is considerably large, especially if we got a pro-bowl talent at either of those spots. The upgrade potential at Jeron Johnson's 3rd safety spot is significant. There is room for improvement in the pass rush, even though it's one of the NFL's better pass rushes this season. To a lesser degree, there is room for improvement at WR, TE, and OL on offense. And what does this FO do other than constantly making its roster better?

I seem to remember a lot of brutally close losses during the Holmgren years too, especially on the road. Right now, this team is basically as good as any team Holmgren ever fielded save his 2005 team, and by seasons end it would not surprise me if the 2012 team was better statistically. And those Seahawks teams played a joke of a schedule.

If nothing else, we are a contending team in a very good NFC. Sometimes teams "underachieve" and win fewer games than their level of play deserved. Last year's team had 8.2 "estimated wins" per FO but only won 7 games. They also underachieved. That said, the 2010, 2009, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, and 2003 Seahawks seasons were all overachieving years who's win totals exceeded their estimated wins, meaning that Seattle won more games than their statistics indicated. So in a way, it could be argued that the law of averages demands we have a couple seasons where the team suffers more than it's share of tough, close losses. This just ended up being one of those years.

Hopefully this team can get luckier or improve to the point where luck doesn't factor quite as often. I'm starting to think that Seattle is beginning to push the boundaries of how unclutch a team can be on the road. I mean, Wilson has a passer rating around 110 in his last two road games combined and is 0-2. At some point, Seattle is going to start winning those road games. It's hard to play that well at QB and still lose the game, especially with the supporting cast the Seahawks boast.

Last edited by kearly on Mon Nov 26, 2012 5:45 pm, edited 2 times in total.

A lot of the frustration is from the fact that we are "this" close to winning these games on the road and yet can't pull them out. I honestly believe if we were getting blown out I think you would see less angst around here. The only thing I will say is our pass rush seems to dissapear on the road when it is most needed...not sure if it is scheme, tiredness, or what.

Overall though - I do believe we have the talent to beat anybody in the NFL on a consistent basis (and we have already proved it this year). That alone is an exciting feeling.

Good thoughts there. Cheers me up a bit. I felt like this prior to this week, but it was just so darn painful to see the D fail again.

One thing I do like is that our biggest issue on defense can be solved by upgrading spots that are up-gradable. We have one year contract guys in Hill and Trufant. Curious to see how Kam continues to play. He needs to step in coverage as well. The running defense game is a different animal, I'm not totally sure the problem. I feel like over aggressiveness plays a role, but we are set up pretty well to defend the run, scheme-wise. Perhaps an inexperienced Wagner in the middle or Red being less effective with his foot problem, or just general fatigue as the season goes.

I didn't like getting beat by the run and having our running game get shut down. That's like our bread and butter on both sides of the ball. It just felt a little different I guess.

Last edited by JKent82 on Mon Nov 26, 2012 2:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

"At some point, Seattle is going to start winning those road games". Devil's Advocate -- says who? There's no evidence to support that. It's amazing we found a way to lose the last two road games when our rookie QB has been so damn good. Why all of a sudden is that going to change? If anything, I'd say that the pattern of finding a way to lose in the end supports the opposite.

Also, I respect your homework and statistical analysis - but the whole DVOA is ... well, I'm not a fan. ONLY WINS AND LOSSES MATTER WHEN IT COMES TO MAKING THE PLAYOFFS. I could care less what our DVOA is if we end up 8-8. It's not going to make me feel better. There's something to be said for stepping away from the stat machine and just watching the reality. FACT: We don't force turnovers or get sacks on the road, and our defense is showing a nasty habit of getting gashed in the run. We are also vanilla on offense, and never have an answer for the Titus Young and Chris Clay's of the world -- even when everyone knows teams are not going to attack Browner or Sherman. Teams are taking advantage of our interior run defense, our poor LB coverage and are lack of consistent pass rush. That's a lot to fix all of a sudden to change these road losses.

Overall, I'm personally optimistic about the team. But let's not shy away from what ultimately matters - the Wins. All the other stats get tucked away in the record book. Wins is the gateway to the playoffs. I think, once again, a lot of people got sucked into the possibility that we are "there" after our big early season wins. I don't think we are quite yet. We still have a shot to make the playoffs, but if we do - it's going to be a road game.

I could happily accept a struggling offense, even a craptasticly boring one. It is the defense I wanted to be our strong suit. Relatives from Buffalo and Chicago both comment on how aggressive and physical our defense was. They loved the big corners. But the weaknesses exposed in our defense has not been fixed, so while seeing growth in the offense a new leak has sprung.

I wouldn't say mediocre but rather uninspired efforts from the defense has cost the team in its efforts to rise above the mediocre zone. Season is running out but it has been entertaining. Heartbreaking but entertaining. Still a chance, so will wait until the end of the season to put it all into perspective.

drdiags wrote:I could happily accept a struggling offense, even a craptasticly boring one. It is the defense I wanted to be our strong suit. Relatives from Buffalo and Chicago both comment on how aggressive and physical our defense was. They loved the big corners. But the weaknesses exposed in our defense has not been fixed, so while seeing growth in the offense a new leak has sprung.

I wouldn't say mediocre but rather uninspired efforts from the defense has cost the team in its efforts to rise above the mediocre zone. Season is running out but it has been entertaining. Heartbreaking but entertaining. Still a chance, so will wait until the end of the season to put it all into perspective.

I think poeple just want to moan and gripe. yes, I was ticked off that once againt he defense choked. YOu could argue 3 of 5 losses are on the defense- AZ (letting Kolb march it down the field to the go ahead TD is on the defense- despite the final drive), DET, MIA. In all cases our team didn't response well in the clutch moments.

It's inconceivable to me that the defense allowed Tannehill and Co to drive from their own 6 to our 30 yard line with relative ease. Tru was getting gashed and needs to be replaced. The pass rush looked to be a beat away from sacks and he'd throw it for a big gain.

We are an exceptional team at home, and only an average team on the road. I say average because all of the losses have been within 1 score. Below Average to me would mean getting demolished on the road, which hasn't happened. We've just has some bad luck closing out games on the road.

Kearly, let us know when stats get you in the playoffs. You have produced a very elaborate example of rationalizing losing. Stats can tell you why a team loses or wins but stats are not infallible. Penalties and turnovers are stat killers.

Those who are comfortable with being average and not making the playoffs love stats. To them it's all to end all. But that is not reality. Getting to the Super Bowl is purely wins and loses nothing more.

" Remember the men and women in uniform that have signed that blank check for us."

v1rotv2 wrote:Kearly, let us know when stats get you in the playoffs. You have produced a very elaborate example of rationalizing losing. Stats can tell you why a team loses or wins but stats are not infallible. Penalties and turnovers are stat killers.

Those who are comfortable with being average and not making the playoffs love stats. To them it's all to end all. But that is not reality. Getting to the Super Bowl is purely wins and loses nothing more.

Why does it have to be about rationalizing losing? There are a ton of people on here who are demanding that PC be on the hot seat and who want to see his coordinators fired. In such instances, producing facts such as the one kearly presents, are important evaluation tools for the future of the franchise. It's the short-sighted "Use your eyes" concept which is the more deadly of the two to a football team.

jlwaters1 wrote:I think poeple just want to moan and gripe. yes, I was ticked off that once againt he defense choked. YOu could argue 3 of 5 losses are on the defense- AZ (letting Kolb march it down the field to the go ahead TD is on the defense- despite the final drive), DET, MIA. In all cases our team didn't response well in the clutch moments.

It's inconceivable to me that the defense allowed Tannehill and Co to drive from their own 6 to our 30 yard line with relative ease. Tru was getting gashed and needs to be replaced. The pass rush looked to be a beat away from sacks and he'd throw it for a big gain.

We are an exceptional team at home, and only an average team on the road. I say average because all of the losses have been within 1 score. Below Average to me would mean getting demolished on the road, which hasn't happened. We've just has some bad luck closing out games on the road.

Based on one win out of 6 attempts we are far below average. Stats and good intentions won't change that record. Coaches are fired and playoffs missed by the wins and loses not stats.

" Remember the men and women in uniform that have signed that blank check for us."

I don't think the team itself is mediocre, I'm just worried that the head coach is. Despite all the stats, we're still looking at finishing around .500, right around where all of Carroll's teams have finished.

No i wont change the record. I have said that I do not want Pete fired so dont act like I am asking for his head.

Next year? Yes I will be if we are not to where I think we will be. And trust me, I fully understand that means starting over, which is something I do not want to go thru yet again. But I will not be happy with 500 seasons into perpituity.

No i wont change the record. I have said that I do not want Pete fired so dont act like I am asking for his head.

Next year? Yes I will be if we are not to where I think we will be. And trust me, I fully understand that means starting over, which is something I do not want to go thru yet again. But I will not be happy with 500 seasons into perpituity.

You might as well be calling for his head. Every post you've made since Miami has speculated over pending doom. Apart from being thoroughly depressing to read over and over again, it's unnecessary. We're 6-5 and leading the race for the post season among the wild card teams. New Orleans go to Atlanta on Sunday. Tampa Bay to Denver. Minnesota plays Green Bay. Even if we're 6-6 this time next week, chances are we'll STILL be the #6 seed.

And this 'think tank' stuff is really daft. I speak for myself, nobody else. It's the opposite of calling someone a hater, but equally 'high school'.

No i wont change the record. I have said that I do not want Pete fired so dont act like I am asking for his head.

Next year? Yes I will be if we are not to where I think we will be. And trust me, I fully understand that means starting over, which is something I do not want to go thru yet again. But I will not be happy with 500 seasons into perpituity.

You might as well be calling for his head. Every post you've made since Miami has speculated over pending doom. Apart from being thoroughly depressing to read over and over again, it's unnecessary. We're 6-5 and leading the race for the post season among the wild card teams. New Orleans go to Atlanta on Sunday. Tampa Bay to Denver. Minnesota plays Green Bay. Even if we're 6-6 this time next week, chances are we'll STILL be the #6 seed.

And this 'think tank' stuff is really daft. I speak for myself, nobody else. It's the opposite of calling someone a hater, but equally 'high school'.

Dude. You should know by now that I am simply not going to change my tune because you or someone else is depressed by it. Take my unnecessary posts, file them in the garbage where you and many others feel they belong and move on.

FlyingGreg wrote:We just can't seem to solve the vexing road issue, for now.

v1rot1 wrote:Based on one win out of 6 attempts we are far below average.

I still say that these statements make it sound like we're losing by 20 points every road game. The reality is that that this team has played well enough to be literally one play away from a win in every single road game, and frustratingly enough, we just haven't been able to come up with that one play.

That distinction doesn't change our record, and it doesn't improve our chances of making the playoffs, no. I grant that.

But it DOES carry huge implications for predicting the rest of the regular season, for our chances in the playoffs should we make it, for our draft needs this season (Trufant's replacement is already on the roster, folks), and especially for the prospects of Pete Carroll and his coordinators.

If you want to talk about our playoff chances, then our record is all that matters. If you want to make sweeping judgments on the abstract quality of this team, its chances in 2013, and the future of its coaches, you'd better be ready to bring more than two numbers into the discussion.

Tech Worlds wrote:Dude. You should know by now that I am simply not going to change my tune because you or someone else is depressed by it. Take my unnecessary posts, file them in the garbage where you and many others feel they belong and move on.

I know I'm going to get jumped on here. I'm not really the "you are what your record says you are" camp, but the whole "hey, look at my big swinging DVOA" doesn't thrill me either.

Yes, we've lost mostly close games. Yes, we haven't been blown out at all, and have had more road games than home games. Atlanta has also had a ton of close games, the difference is they win them. And I don't think they have really any better talent than we do as a team; better offensive weapons and a QB who is more experience, if not playing better than ours now, and we have the defensive edge still. But, good teams find ways to win. We're not a good team yet. BUT, we're not a bad team. Mediocre. Average. Whatever.

Thing is, to start the season our defense was great, and our offense was still learning. Now, our offense is showing a steady sign of progression from game to game, while the defense is regressing. Good offense....poor defense (lately. take the last 4 games, take out the good games and we're trending downward.....per DVOA). So, one squad is playing well, the other is playing sub-par. Mediocre. Average.

Yup, the Giants won their division last year at 9-7 (at the last game I might add), then went on to win the SB. Difference is, they were raging on all cylinders at the end of the year, while we are trending downwards in certain areas. Look at the DVOA of the teams we've played: we're making poor passing teams look good, good rushing teams look elite, and well the Jets are the Jets. That's a problem...making teams look better against us than they do against, well, everyone else.

OK, so say we can't win a road game, but we'll go perfect at home, right ? And 9-7 may be good enough to get into the playoffs, per English. here's the problem: who says we'll be the 49ers at home ? We have a disturbing trend of getting gashed up the middle of our defense on runs, and the 49ers are trending into a very good groove right now. Everything is working for them, hell their backup QB just went into NO and won a game.....and we just lost to Miami.

Oh, and Tampa Bay and NO scare me. They are hot right now, this is a league that favors offense anyways, and their DVOA is better than ours offensively the last 4-5 games. There, I said it.

MontanaHawk05 wrote:If you want to talk about our playoff chances, then our record is all that matters. If you want to make sweeping judgments on the abstract quality of this team, its chances in 2013, and the future of its coaches, you'd better be ready to bring more than two numbers into the discussion.

The first part of the season we prayed the Defense kept us in it long enough for the Offense to click. Then it seemed they both were on the same page. Now I pray the Offense can sustain a 12 minute drive so the Defense isn't on the field trying to stop the run. I said all along that I would take this season for what it was.

And it has shaped up to be just what we are seeing. But these games are so close and we have so many good players that I too, have gotten caught up in it all and started to expect more! To me, The plan is in it's final stage. If we aren't winning these close games next season, Heads will be called for. Now it seems like we are still a couple, maybe three decent players away from 'being there'

We are easily one of the healthiest teams in the league. Can't expect that every year.

(I don't know what the DVOA for that is called but there must be a metric, for the love of god). Mike Sando did post something just the other day that we are in the top few for guys on IR. I suspect for missed games we are as well.

I don't understand the your statement lets assume you are what your record says you are.We don't have to assume anything.Thats exactly what we are.6-5. Maybe we are the best 6-5 team in the league but still 6-5.We lost to teams that are barely mediocre and barely beat maybe the worst team in the league in Carolina.I could care less about strength of schedule, DVOA, how good Wilson looked or 3rd down conversion rates.The only stat that counts is the scoreboard and your record.Wilson looked great but the truth is we scored 14 points and our statistic on D didn't matter when they made Tannehill look all pro when it counts.This team is young and they will get better when we have a core of players that become leaders and make the plays that pull these kind of games out but right now these players are not doing what it takes to win close games.There is a fine line between good teams and mediocre.Right now we are mediocre.

FlyingGreg wrote:We just can't seem to solve the vexing road issue, for now.

v1rot1 wrote:Based on one win out of 6 attempts we are far below average.

I still say that these statements make it sound like we're losing by 20 points every road game. The reality is that that this team has played well enough to be literally one play away from a win in every single road game, and frustratingly enough, we just haven't been able to come up with that one play.

That distinction doesn't change our record, and it doesn't improve our chances of making the playoffs, no. I grant that.

But it DOES carry huge implications for predicting the rest of the regular season, for our chances in the playoffs should we make it, for our draft needs this season (Trufant's replacement is already on the roster, folks), and especially for the prospects of Pete Carroll and his coordinators.

If you want to talk about our playoff chances, then our record is all that matters. If you want to make sweeping judgments on the abstract quality of this team, its chances in 2013, and the future of its coaches, you'd better be ready to bring more than two numbers into the discussion.

Again, it just depends on what you are looking for. Plenty of fans in here seem to be content because we are "losing nicely". That's fine, I guess.

But there are a lot of fans that want real results, not just the trophy for every kid on the team analogy.

I fear a lot of fans have been lulled into acceptance of the middle of the road. If you look at the history of our team, we are historically heavily weighted in the 7-9 to 9-7 range. It's ok to want more.

I think it boils down to us as individuals more than anything, and it's not something that is easily changed or manipulated based on internet posts. We all get that, I think. It's like arguing politics - futile. There's good points on both sides of the street and I see why people are on either side. Some people have the patience to embrace the small steps and positive outlook for the future, others are just tired of playing the "just the tip" game and want to ram it home.

FlyingGreg wrote:Again, it just depends on what you are looking for. Plenty of fans in here seem to be content because we are "losing nicely". That's fine, I guess.

But there are a lot of fans that want real results, not just the trophy for every kid on the team analogy.

No, that's not the issue at all. No one is content with "losing nicely" or perennially being middle of the pack. Some people just realize that there are many, many tools that are better than W-L for predictive analysis, and there is a mountain of evidence to suggest that the Seahawks are better than an average team as 6-5 would suggest. It would be foolish to give up on the season, as many on this board (not you) seem to be doing, when we are currently in a playoff position, are a better team than those we are tied with, and have a softer remaining schedule than those teams we are tied with.

Very good and informative read to the OP. The road woes for the Seahawks though is nothing new. It has been a problem for the last couple years now. If there is any silver lining in all this is that your offence has been playing well on road games (something that was lacking last year). It's just been the defence that has let games slip away in the final quarter this year on the road.

I don't get to see alot of Seahawks game indepth since my allegiance is to another team but the games I have seen of the Hawks on the road is their inability to adjust in the second half when the opposing offence changes things up.

I am hoping you guys are able to improve on this. It's big plus for our division to have meaningful games in December between NFCW teams competeing for playoff contention. Your not out of it yet but you got to get it done against the Bears. WHY? Because I'm taking you guys to beat the Bears on my Parlay

The Bears are a wounded team losing 6 starters including Briggs (ankle), Forte (ankle), Tillman (ankle) and Hester (concussion). Those are impact players. Though hearing about a possible suspension of BOTH of your corners is disheartening. Is that suspension official and has it been confirmed?

FlyingGreg wrote:Again, it just depends on what you are looking for. Plenty of fans in here seem to be content because we are "losing nicely". That's fine, I guess.

But there are a lot of fans that want real results, not just the trophy for every kid on the team analogy.

No, that's not the issue at all. No one is content with "losing nicely" or perennially being middle of the pack. Some people just realize that there are many, many tools that are better than W-L for predictive analysis, and there is a mountain of evidence to suggest that the Seahawks are better than an average team as 6-5 would suggest. It would be foolish to give up on the season, as many on this board (not you) seem to be doing, when we are currently in a playoff position, are a better team than those we are tied with, and have a softer remaining schedule than those teams we are tied with.

Understood...but again, that's nothing tangible - it's a placebo and wishful thinking. That's my point. Why all of a sudden are they going to fix the things we keep seeing (no pass rush, not forcing turnovers, porous run defense, etc.) on the road? Because we have a high DVOA? That doesn't make sense.

We can't keep losing games we should win and expect to make the playoffs. We are in a good spot, but our margin of error is razor thin now and I think that's what evokes the passion. Beating Chicago this week would be a major, major boost.

And again, the "mountain of evidence" means exactly squat as compared to wins.

I like you a lot Kearly. I always look forward to your "trademarked" random thoughts. You state your points in a most elequent manor, and you are obviously a talented writer. That said I disagree with this post. You're putting far too much weight on DVOA performance, football is harder to quantify by numbers than say baseball. My are eyes telling me that the Seahawks are a mediocre football team at this point in time. This season has been very weird, at any given time the Seahawks can hang with the best of teams. We beat some of the best teams in the NFL, however we have also lost to some of the NFL's most underwelming teams. This team has no consistancy, and we make too many mistakes and mental lapses to be considered a good team at this moment both in coaching and play. We are a talented team, no doubt about that -- but right now our play is not running congruent to that talent level.

Atlanta has a much more experienced roster that has played together and built team chemistry. They have one rookie on their entire 53-man roster. They've had the same head coach for five or six years. Their QB is in year 5.

Seattle is the 3rd or 4th youngest team in the NFL. The Hawks have 5 rookies I can think of who are starting or seeing significant playing time--including the QB and Mike LB. Other key players are in just their second or third year in the NFL. It's our head coach's third year, and he and his GM have had to completely rebuild the roster.

In spite of all that inexperience--both as individuals and a team--the Seahawks have been in every game this season. They have yet to lose by more than 7 points.

Are some of the issues on the coaching staff? Yep. But we are also seeing the type of growing pains typical for a young team. The team is on the verge, but we are going to have to be patient a little while longer.

FlyingGreg wrote:We just can't seem to solve the vexing road issue, for now.

v1rot1 wrote:Based on one win out of 6 attempts we are far below average.

I still say that these statements make it sound like we're losing by 20 points every road game. The reality is that that this team has played well enough to be literally one play away from a win in every single road game, and frustratingly enough, we just haven't been able to come up with that one play.

That distinction doesn't change our record, and it doesn't improve our chances of making the playoffs, no. I grant that.

But it DOES carry huge implications for predicting the rest of the regular season, for our chances in the playoffs should we make it, for our draft needs this season (Trufant's replacement is already on the roster, folks), and especially for the prospects of Pete Carroll and his coordinators.

If you want to talk about our playoff chances, then our record is all that matters. If you want to make sweeping judgments on the abstract quality of this team, its chances in 2013, and the future of its coaches, you'd better be ready to bring more than two numbers into the discussion.

Nice post. We are much better off than we were 3-4 years ago. Yes people can come with the wins and losses are all that matters argument , and in the ultimate end it does. Yet I'm encouraged that we aren't losing by embarrasing margins. We're almost there.

FlyingGreg wrote:Understood...but again, that's nothing tangible - it's a placebo and wishful thinking. That's my point. Why all of a sudden are they going to fix the things we keep seeing (no pass rush, not forcing turnovers, porous run defense, etc.) on the road? Because we have a high DVOA? That doesn't make sense.

You're overstating those road issues because we lost the games. Our defense has forced 10 turnovers in 6 road games compared to 9 turnovers in 5 home games. It has allowed 108 rushing yards per game on the road compared to 109.4 rushing yards per game at home. We have 17 sacks in 5 home games compared to 12 sacks in 6 road games, but those numbers are skewed by the incredible performance against the Packers. The team really hasn't performed at a much lower level on the road compared to at home. It just seems that way because of the W-L columns.

FlyingGreg wrote:We can't keep losing games we should win and expect to make the playoffs. We are in a good spot, but our margin of error is razor thin now and I think that's what evokes the passion. Beating Chicago this week would be a major, major boost.

You're right about that. It sucks that we have lost so many games we were in a position to win, but losing those games is not an indication that we will lose similar games in the future. How we performed in those games is a better indicator of what to predict for the future.

I wish our DVOA could get off the field on 3rd down, get sacks and force turnovers!

It isn't just DVOA that ranks the Seahawks as a better than average team. Advanced NFL Stats Team Efficiency rankings (through week 11) had us at #4, Sagarin ratings have us at #10, Point differential has us at #11 despite one of the league's toughest schedules. There isn't a statistical model out there that considers the Seahawks an average or worse team.

That's all great info...but NONE of it gets us to the promised land. The NFL playoffs are based solely on wins and losses. Are we going to fly a "DVOA Champions" banner at C Link next season, even if we finish 8-8??

I'm optimistic for the future...just not sure when the future will arrive. There's a lot to fix with this team when we play on the road. Facts are facts, we are 1-5 away from C Link. Period. No points for style or progress, as far as tangible results go.

Of course -- we are a better team and improving. No question. I'm just not sold that we are going to find our way this season, necessarily.

FlyingGreg wrote:That's all great info...but NONE of it gets us to the promised land. The NFL playoffs are based solely on wins and losses. Are we going to fly a "DVOA Champions" banner at C Link next season, even if we finish 8-8??

I'm optimistic for the future...just not sure when the future will arrive. There's a lot to fix with this team when we play on the road. Facts are facts, we are 1-5 away from C Link. Period. No points for style or progress, as far as tangible results go.

Of course -- we are a better team and improving. No question. I'm just not sold that we are going to find our way this season, necessarily.

We'll see.

Good God do you not understand what they're saying?

No, DVOA doesn't change the record. That's not what they're saying. What they, and the numbers, say is that according to basically all stats out there, chances are we WON'T go 8-8, and that we've played more like a 7-4, 8-3 team rather than a 6-5. The NFL Playoffs are based on W/L, you're correct, and nobody is disputing that. DVOA, Sagarin, etc. are all just useful tools to project future success based on past performance, and they're much more reliable than going simply off W/L.

FlyingGreg wrote:That's all great info...but NONE of it gets us to the promised land. The NFL playoffs are based solely on wins and losses. Are we going to fly a "DVOA Champions" banner at C Link next season, even if we finish 8-8??

I'm optimistic for the future...just not sure when the future will arrive. There's a lot to fix with this team when we play on the road. Facts are facts, we are 1-5 away from C Link. Period. No points for style or progress, as far as tangible results go.

Of course -- we are a better team and improving. No question. I'm just not sold that we are going to find our way this season, necessarily.

We'll see.

Good God do you not understand what they're saying?

No, DVOA doesn't change the record. That's not what they're saying. What they, and the numbers, say is that according to basically all stats out there, chances are we WON'T go 8-8, and that we've played more like a 7-4, 8-3 team rather than a 6-5. The NFL Playoffs are based on W/L, you're correct, and nobody is disputing that. DVOA, Sagarin, etc. are all just useful tools to project future success based on past performance, and they're much more reliable than going simply off W/L.

Good god, YES I understand what they are saying. Calm down, Spartacus. I'm not going to suddenly buy into the stats theatrics because you want me to. Stop trying. I'm not knocking it, I just don't agree with it. How dare someone have a contrary opinion!

I prefer to evaluate the team and assess what I see and not get wrapped up in all the psychobabble. Just me, I guess.

You can wet dream all over the "projections" and ratings, that's fine.

Most of the posts in this thread so far have elements of truth to them.

I agree that 6-5 is not statistically significant by itself. Most of our games have been close and the 95% confidence interval around our record is probably between 3-8 and 9-2 right now. On the other hand, our home and road splits are very statistically significant. 5-0 vs. 1-5 is disparate enough that low sample size would only account for this maybe one time in a thousand. We do appear to be an above average team at home, and a below average team on the road.

Does it matter that our losing scores have been close? I do not think so. In my opinion our close road losses are due mostly to our conservative decisions rather than the result of extreme unluckiness. Many of Pete Carroll's coaching decisions are made to keep the score close at the expense of win probability and that keeps us from getting blown out but makes a narrow loss more likely.

Personally, I felt our Miami loss was the result of coaching. Our coaching staff leaned hard on the defense with an overly conservative offensive game plan, and it didn't work. We punted from the Miami 35 yard line and the Miami 38 yard line, despite the latter being a very make-able 4th and 1 conversion. At the end of the game we were in long field goal range for a possible game winning attempt, but rather than chewing the clock and picking up a couple more yards to make it a 50-55 yarder we opted to go for the first on passing plays which led to yet another punt. If we attempt all three and make just one then we win this game.

As far as our defense goes, I think it is important to note that they only gave up 7 points through 3 quarters despite our conservative offensive approach and could well have had a second INT. Unfortunately, things for them fell apart in the fourth quarter and I can see why fans who care that we are considered "elite" may be concerned about this. I just care about wins, however, and am not shocked that Tru, Hill and our plus sized defensive line wore down in the sun after the way the previous three quarters went. If we had gone for it a little more and succeeded with a field goal or a touchdown, they may well have gone away from the run a bit which probably would have led to a lopsided win for us.

My primary concern going forward is the offensive line. They did not win many battles up front in either pass protection or run blocking. The dolphins defensive line is probably their best unit, but we have had problems a couple of times this season with protection assignments against a 3-4. Coming off a bye I would have expected better performance from an Okung-Carpenter-Unger-McQuistan-Giacomini line, especially considering that we are hoping that most of those players will be long term contributors.

BayAreafbfan wrote:... Though hearing about a possible suspension of BOTH of your corners is disheartening. Is that suspension official and has it been confirmed?

They are appealing the suspensions and a hearing hasn't been set yet. So far, they are expected to play against the Bears unless the league fast tracks their appeals. I think they miss the 49ers game which will impact that game's competitive value. Will severely reduce the chance of the game being as low scoring as the one in Candlestick. But it is a divisional game, so the effort should be good.

Good luck on your parlay, hope the team can help put some money in your pocket.

FlyingGreg wrote:That's all great info...but NONE of it gets us to the promised land. The NFL playoffs are based solely on wins and losses. Are we going to fly a "DVOA Champions" banner at C Link next season, even if we finish 8-8??

I'm optimistic for the future...just not sure when the future will arrive. There's a lot to fix with this team when we play on the road. Facts are facts, we are 1-5 away from C Link. Period. No points for style or progress, as far as tangible results go.

Of course -- we are a better team and improving. No question. I'm just not sold that we are going to find our way this season, necessarily.

We'll see.

Good God do you not understand what they're saying?

No, DVOA doesn't change the record. That's not what they're saying. What they, and the numbers, say is that according to basically all stats out there, chances are we WON'T go 8-8, and that we've played more like a 7-4, 8-3 team rather than a 6-5. The NFL Playoffs are based on W/L, you're correct, and nobody is disputing that. DVOA, Sagarin, etc. are all just useful tools to project future success based on past performance, and they're much more reliable than going simply off W/L.

Good god, YES I understand what they are saying. Calm down, Spartacus. I'm not going to suddenly buy into the stats theatrics because you want me to. Stop trying. I'm not knocking it, I just don't agree with it. How dare someone have a contrary opinion!

I prefer to evaluate the team and assess what I see and not get wrapped up in all the psychobabble. Just me, I guess.

You can wet dream all over the "projections" and ratings, that's fine.

Those aren't theatrics, Greg. They're facts. They happened.

You're right in saying that stats don't equal wins. They don't. But they do illustrate on a micro level what's been happening in the games the Hawks have played. And the picture they paint isn't as bad as 6-5 suggests.

You say that you prefer to go by what you see, but as Jewhawk pointed out, what you see is being skewed somewhere, because it doesn't match up with reality. You say you want to see more turnovers forced on the road like they do at home, when there's not really any disparity. You say you want to see better run defense on the road when the run defense has actually been BETTER on average on the road.

Obviously, we need more road WINS - stats be damned - but we're not losing those games because of the things you mentioned as "what you see." Wouldn't it be better to actually figure out what IS leading to those losses? Because right now, the only "psychobabble" isn't coming from the stats guys... it's coming from the folks who think they know what's leading to the road losses when they couldn't be farther off.

Penalties have also been a very significant part of these losses. You simply cannot beat the officials and the other team and expect to win. 12 men on the field twice in one game? At this point of the season?

ChrisB Bacon wrote:Good God do you not understand what they're saying?

No, DVOA doesn't change the record. That's not what they're saying. What they, and the numbers, say is that according to basically all stats out there, chances are we WON'T go 8-8, and that we've played more like a 7-4, 8-3 team rather than a 6-5. The NFL Playoffs are based on W/L, you're correct, and nobody is disputing that. DVOA, Sagarin, etc. are all just useful tools to project future success based on past performance, and they're much more reliable than going simply off W/L.

Good god, YES I understand what they are saying. Calm down, Spartacus. I'm not going to suddenly buy into the stats theatrics because you want me to. Stop trying. I'm not knocking it, I just don't agree with it. How dare someone have a contrary opinion!

I prefer to evaluate the team and assess what I see and not get wrapped up in all the psychobabble. Just me, I guess.

You can wet dream all over the "projections" and ratings, that's fine.

Those aren't theatrics, Greg. They're facts. They happened.

You're right in saying that stats don't equal wins. They don't. But they do illustrate on a micro level what's been happening in the games the Hawks have played. And the picture they paint isn't as bad as 6-5 suggests.

You say that you prefer to go by what you see, but as Jewhawk pointed out, what you see is being skewed somewhere, because it doesn't match up with reality. You say you want to see more turnovers forced on the road like they do at home, when there's not really any disparity. You say you want to see better run defense on the road when the run defense has actually been BETTER on average on the road.

Obviously, we need more road WINS - stats be damned - but we're not losing those games because of the things you mentioned as "what you see." Wouldn't it be better to actually figure out what IS leading to those losses? Because right now, the only "psychobabble" isn't coming from the stats guys... it's coming from the folks who think they know what's leading to the road losses when they couldn't be farther off.

Furthermore, the eye test is skewed by the sadness circle jerk that happens on this board after every loss, and the 'eye test' is also a failure if we'd won the game. A crappy team can win the game, but they're more than likely to lose the following games, but by your criteria, it only matters if they win. So when it comes to the facts you're supposedly laying down, the reality is that your interpretation is skewed by the fact that you A) either want to be right or B) want to feel down about the whole thing in light of difference evidence.

Also, it astonishes me how so many people want to piss on others' parades. I don't know if it's ever occurred to people that some of us like watching our team be competitive, win or lose, and we're not rationalizing a loss so much as enjoying the process rather than just the results.

You're right in saying that stats don't equal wins. They don't. But they do illustrate on a micro level what's been happening in the games the Hawks have played. And the picture they paint isn't as bad as 6-5 suggests.

You say that you prefer to go by what you see, but as Jewhawk pointed out, what you see is being skewed somewhere, because it doesn't match up with reality. You say you want to see more turnovers forced on the road like they do at home, when there's not really any disparity. You say you want to see better run defense on the road when the run defense has actually been BETTER on average on the road.

Obviously, we need more road WINS - stats be damned - but we're not losing those games because of the things you mentioned as "what you see." Wouldn't it be better to actually figure out what IS leading to those losses? Because right now, the only "psychobabble" isn't coming from the stats guys... it's coming from the folks who think they know what's leading to the road losses when they couldn't be farther off.

And I have stated repeatedly I am very optimistic about this team. I just don't think it's necessarily our time right now. I'm not so sure why that's such a leap to believe - we have a very tough road ahead. How confident are you when this team takes the field on the road? I wish I could get excited about projections and trends when we have put up a 1-5 record -- and that one road win was lucky (Newton missed a wide open receiver in the end zone).

I still think we can make the playoffs this season. But in order to get there, we HAVE TO WIN BOTH REMAINING ROAD GAMES. I don't see us getting in at 9-7 "if" we sweep the last 3 home games (and that would mean beating SF) and lose to Chicago and Buffalo. That's just me, I guess. So somehow this week we are all of a sudden going to "get it"? Perhaps.

As far as what I have seen - I've seen us lose our last two road games when our rookie QB had a 125+ rating and our defense, however you want to explain it, lost the game. Plain and simple. This is why I don't fall in love with statistics and projections. Perhaps they will finally make it happen this week in Chicago - we can only hope.

The problem with throwing season stats out as supporting a point is it's skewed, in both directions. For instance...half of Chris Clemons sacks came in ONE HALF. So is 8 sacks a good season for him, or is it that he only has 4 in all of the other games combined? We lost in Miami, and we forced one turnover and had one sack. Our defense allowed an offense that would never be labeled as "powerful" rack up almost 450 yds, including almost 200 on the ground. And they marched right down the field to win the game in the closing seconds. We lost in Detroit, and we forced one turnover and had two sacks. Our defense allowed Detroit to eat up the last 5 minutes of the game on a 16-play, 80-yard drive to win the game.

Stats and feel-good projections aside -- don't you want a defense that can come up with a stop? What good does it do to be highly "ranked" when this happens?

And as I have said, i respect those who want to use the stats and rankings etc. I don't begrudge you. I just don't see it the same way...which is fine, right?

This team is so much better than the 2009 version that got blown out, and it's easy to be excited about where we are headed. I think the biggest issue with the road demons are this isn't something new and I had hoped the current regime would find a way to solve it -- not going unbeaten on the road, of course, but something other than winning one or two every season. I think that's the last bridge for us to cross on the way to being a perennial contender.

FlyingGreg wrote:And I have stated repeatedly I am very optimistic about this team. I just don't think it's necessarily our time right now. I'm not so sure why that's such a leap to believe - we have a very tough road ahead. How confident are you when this team takes the field on the road? I wish I could get excited about projections and trends when we have put up a 1-5 record -- and that one road win was lucky (Newton missed a wide open receiver in the end zone).

I still think we can make the playoffs this season. But in order to get there, we HAVE TO WIN BOTH REMAINING ROAD GAMES. I don't see us getting in at 9-7 "if" we sweep the last 3 home games (and that would mean beating SF) and lose to Chicago and Buffalo. That's just me, I guess. So somehow this week we are all of a sudden going to "get it"? Perhaps.

As far as what I have seen - I've seen us lose our last two road games when our rookie QB had a 125+ rating and our defense, however you want to explain it, lost the game. Plain and simple. This is why I don't fall in love with statistics and projections. Perhaps they will finally make it happen this week in Chicago - we can only hope.

The problem with throwing season stats out as supporting a point is it's skewed, in both directions. For instance...half of Chris Clemons sacks came in ONE HALF. So is 8 sacks a good season for him, or is it that he only has 4 in all of the other games combined? We lost in Miami, and we forced one turnover and had one sack. Our defense allowed an offense that would never be labeled as "powerful" rack up almost 450 yds, including almost 200 on the ground. And they marched right down the field to win the game in the closing seconds. We lost in Detroit, and we forced one turnover and had two sacks. Our defense allowed Detroit to eat up the last 5 minutes of the game on a 16-play, 80-yard drive to win the game.

Stats and feel-good projections aside -- don't you want a defense that can come up with a stop? What good does it do to be highly "ranked" when this happens?

And as I have said, i respect those who want to use the stats and rankings etc. I don't begrudge you. I just don't see it the same way...which is fine, right?

Before reading this, I'd just like to point out that I kind of agree with you, but also disagree. Stats are a good indicator of the quality of the team but context DOES matter, in a way that also means that things that DON'T count as stats balance out the context of the stats to some extent (take forcing 2 intentional grounding throws against Tom Brady, which don't register as sacks, even though Clemons forced one)

Does a sack matter if the player is forcing the QB to throw the ball quickly, inaccurately and more importantly... incomplete?Sacks look good on the sheet, but we're 3rd in terms of yards, 2nd in terms of passing TDs allowed, yet we still have more sacks than the 3 teams ahead of us in those stats (Steelers, 49ers in yards, Ravens in TDs).

The reality is, it doesn't matter if we allow 450 yards in a game if the opposition doesn't score a TD. Even if they do, if its tied at 21-21 with 80 seconds to go and 400 yards allowed and we force a 3 and out and go on to win the game in OT, nobody cares.If it's tied at 21 all, we've only allowed 150 yards all game (special teams has let us down) and we concede 50 yards and a FG in the final 2 minutes, then you've allowed a respectable 200 yards in the game but failed to prevent them from driving when it matters most.

What seems to be the problem is that from 5 games where we've needed to stop the offense in the final 5 minutes of the game, we've allowed Kevin Kolb to drive 80 yards for a TD in 4 minutes 20 seconds, Matthew Stafford to drive 80 yards for a TD in 5 minutes 7 seconds and Ryan Tannehill to drive 80 yards for a TD in 2 minutes 40 seconds, and then minutes later, a further 65 yards in 1 minute 30 seconds to set up the winning field goal.

An honourable mention goes to when we allowed Cam Newton to drive 79 yards in 7 minutes before stopping them from scoring (and essentially winning us the game). Which shows it doesn't matter how many yards you allow or how many sacks you get AS LONG AS THEY DON'T SCORE. It's all about WHEN, not about WHAT. Take the Carolina game again as an example, what do you think was more important, Clemons four sacks in the first half against GB or Irvin's strip-sack fumble to end the Carolina game?With less than a minute left on the clock it's unlikely the Panthers would have driven down the field for a TD considering they didnt' score one on offense all game, but that fumble ended the game and made sure they wouldn't.

The defense DID come up with big stops against NE and Carolina, but Newton missed a wide open WR in that 4th down throw which could have won the game for them and we'd be looking at our defense allowing 4 80 yard TD drives when we've been up by a score or less in the 4th quarter (out of 5 games).

FlyingGreg wrote:And I have stated repeatedly I am very optimistic about this team. I just don't think it's necessarily our time right now. I'm not so sure why that's such a leap to believe - we have a very tough road ahead. How confident are you when this team takes the field on the road? I wish I could get excited about projections and trends when we have put up a 1-5 record -- and that one road win was lucky (Newton missed a wide open receiver in the end zone).

I still think we can make the playoffs this season. But in order to get there, we HAVE TO WIN BOTH REMAINING ROAD GAMES. I don't see us getting in at 9-7 "if" we sweep the last 3 home games (and that would mean beating SF) and lose to Chicago and Buffalo. That's just me, I guess. So somehow this week we are all of a sudden going to "get it"? Perhaps.

As far as what I have seen - I've seen us lose our last two road games when our rookie QB had a 125+ rating and our defense, however you want to explain it, lost the game. Plain and simple. This is why I don't fall in love with statistics and projections. Perhaps they will finally make it happen this week in Chicago - we can only hope.

The problem with throwing season stats out as supporting a point is it's skewed, in both directions. For instance...half of Chris Clemons sacks came in ONE HALF. So is 8 sacks a good season for him, or is it that he only has 4 in all of the other games combined? We lost in Miami, and we forced one turnover and had one sack. Our defense allowed an offense that would never be labeled as "powerful" rack up almost 450 yds, including almost 200 on the ground. And they marched right down the field to win the game in the closing seconds. We lost in Detroit, and we forced one turnover and had two sacks. Our defense allowed Detroit to eat up the last 5 minutes of the game on a 16-play, 80-yard drive to win the game.

Stats and feel-good projections aside -- don't you want a defense that can come up with a stop? What good does it do to be highly "ranked" when this happens?

And as I have said, i respect those who want to use the stats and rankings etc. I don't begrudge you. I just don't see it the same way...which is fine, right?

This team is so much better than the 2009 version that got blown out, and it's easy to be excited about where we are headed. I think the biggest issue with the road demons are this isn't something new and I had hoped the current regime would find a way to solve it -- not going unbeaten on the road, of course, but something other than winning one or two every season. I think that's the last bridge for us to cross on the way to being a perennial contender.

First off, I agree that this isn't our year. Knowing we'd be breaking in a new QB no matter who it was, still having some obvious holes and health issues... I figured us for a team that would challenge for a postseason spot, but not one that was likely to advance very far if it got in.

Second, I think it speaks to your ever so slightly skewed viewpoint when you point out that our only road win was because we were lucky against Carolina, but don't also acknowledge that the Rams were lucky the officials didn't see Carroll calling timeout... or that the Dolphins were lucky that Tannehill's INT in the end zone was negated by the most ticky-tack "roughing" call in recent memory... or any other number of single plays that could easily have gone one way or the other in determining the outcome of our road games. That's one reason I often like to look at the FO stats rather than just looking at 1-5 and going, "we suck on the road." Because the fact of the matter is that every single game we've lost on the road has come down to a matter of just a handful of plays. That's worlds better than we used to do on the road, and that matters (and is reflected in the "psychobabble" of the stats).

By the way, we won 2 on the road in 2010 and 3 on the road last year. So even last year, we weren't mired in a perpetual 1 or 2 road wins cycle. I think this year's team is better than last year's team. It's shown in the overall record so far. It's just odd that the gutsy calls/outstanding, miracle like plays and the bonehead decisions/bad breaks have separated so cleanly into home/road splits.

I will acknowledge that looking at overall season stats will tend to gloss over individual bad games. But you seem to still have some disconnect here... just because I can look at the stats and say, "overall, the defense has been pretty damn good this year" doesn't mean I don't want a defense that's going to get a crucial stop in the 4th quarter. Those things aren't mutually exclusive. I can feel overall pretty good about what the stats are showing, yet still be concerned over a recent performance. I'm multi-talented that way. Don't make the mistake of thinking that just because people are optimistic about the team because of the stats, it means they're happy about a .500 season. It just means they think that the stats - which indicate how the team has played throughout the season... something that doesn't always show up in the W/L column - suggest that the wins will come and it will get better.

FlyingGreg wrote:And I have stated repeatedly I am very optimistic about this team. I just don't think it's necessarily our time right now. I'm not so sure why that's such a leap to believe - we have a very tough road ahead. How confident are you when this team takes the field on the road? I wish I could get excited about projections and trends when we have put up a 1-5 record -- and that one road win was lucky (Newton missed a wide open receiver in the end zone).

I still think we can make the playoffs this season. But in order to get there, we HAVE TO WIN BOTH REMAINING ROAD GAMES. I don't see us getting in at 9-7 "if" we sweep the last 3 home games (and that would mean beating SF) and lose to Chicago and Buffalo. That's just me, I guess. So somehow this week we are all of a sudden going to "get it"? Perhaps.

As far as what I have seen - I've seen us lose our last two road games when our rookie QB had a 125+ rating and our defense, however you want to explain it, lost the game. Plain and simple. This is why I don't fall in love with statistics and projections. Perhaps they will finally make it happen this week in Chicago - we can only hope.

The problem with throwing season stats out as supporting a point is it's skewed, in both directions. For instance...half of Chris Clemons sacks came in ONE HALF. So is 8 sacks a good season for him, or is it that he only has 4 in all of the other games combined? We lost in Miami, and we forced one turnover and had one sack. Our defense allowed an offense that would never be labeled as "powerful" rack up almost 450 yds, including almost 200 on the ground. And they marched right down the field to win the game in the closing seconds. We lost in Detroit, and we forced one turnover and had two sacks. Our defense allowed Detroit to eat up the last 5 minutes of the game on a 16-play, 80-yard drive to win the game.

Stats and feel-good projections aside -- don't you want a defense that can come up with a stop? What good does it do to be highly "ranked" when this happens?

And as I have said, i respect those who want to use the stats and rankings etc. I don't begrudge you. I just don't see it the same way...which is fine, right?

This team is so much better than the 2009 version that got blown out, and it's easy to be excited about where we are headed. I think the biggest issue with the road demons are this isn't something new and I had hoped the current regime would find a way to solve it -- not going unbeaten on the road, of course, but something other than winning one or two every season. I think that's the last bridge for us to cross on the way to being a perennial contender.

First off, I agree that this isn't our year. Knowing we'd be breaking in a new QB no matter who it was, still having some obvious holes and health issues... I figured us for a team that would challenge for a postseason spot, but not one that was likely to advance very far if it got in.

Second, I think it speaks to your ever so slightly skewed viewpoint when you point out that our only road win was because we were lucky against Carolina, but don't also acknowledge that the Rams were lucky the officials didn't see Carroll calling timeout... or that the Dolphins were lucky that Tannehill's INT in the end zone was negated by the most ticky-tack "roughing" call in recent memory... or any other number of single plays that could easily have gone one way or the other in determining the outcome of our road games. That's one reason I often like to look at the FO stats rather than just looking at 1-5 and going, "we suck on the road." Because the fact of the matter is that every single game we've lost on the road has come down to a matter of just a handful of plays. That's worlds better than we used to do on the road, and that matters (and is reflected in the "psychobabble" of the stats).

By the way, we won 2 on the road in 2010 and 3 on the road last year. So even last year, we weren't mired in a perpetual 1 or 2 road wins cycle. I think this year's team is better than last year's team. It's shown in the overall record so far. It's just odd that the gutsy calls/outstanding, miracle like plays and the bonehead decisions/bad breaks have separated so cleanly into home/road splits.

I will acknowledge that looking at overall season stats will tend to gloss over individual bad games. But you seem to still have some disconnect here... just because I can look at the stats and say, "overall, the defense has been pretty damn good this year" doesn't mean I don't want a defense that's going to get a crucial stop in the 4th quarter. Those things aren't mutually exclusive. I can feel overall pretty good about what the stats are showing, yet still be concerned over a recent performance. I'm multi-talented that way. Don't make the mistake of thinking that just because people are optimistic about the team because of the stats, it means they're happy about a .500 season. It just means they think that the stats - which indicate how the team has played throughout the season... something that doesn't always show up in the W/L column - suggest that the wins will come and it will get better.

You support and explain your opinion really well. I can't disagree with the heart of it.

I think we both want the same thing, obviously -- we just differ in how we see things, which is cool. Like I said, we win the last two games on the road and a lot of this will make much more sense to me.